• About
    • Which Energy Mix is this?
  • Climate News Network Archive
  • Contact
The climate news that makes a difference.
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
No Result
View All Result
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
  FEATURED
Danske Bank Quits New Fossil Fuel Financing January 23, 2023
Extreme Warming Ahead Even as Worst-Case Scenarios Grow ‘Obsolete’ January 23, 2023
Notley Scorches Federal Just Transition Bill as Fossil CEO Calls for Oilsands Boom January 23, 2023
IRON OXIDE: New Battery Brings Long-Duration Storage to Grids, 750 Jobs to West Virginia January 23, 2023
BREAKING: GFANZ Banks, Investors Pour Hundreds of Billions into Fossil Fuels January 17, 2023
Next
Prev

Fukushima Nuclear Disaster Was Preventable, Japanese High Court Rules

October 1, 2020
Reading time: 2 minutes

naturalflow/flickr

naturalflow/flickr

5
SHARES
 

The devastating Fukushima nuclear power plant meltdowns and explosions in 2011 could have been prevented, a Japanese high court concluded Wednesday, in a ruling that triggered about US$9.5 million (¥1 billion) in damages for thousands of residents who lost their livelihoods and could also lead to further compensation claims.

The 3,550 plaintiffs “were forced to flee their homes after a magnitude-9 earthquake triggered a tsunami that devastated the country’s northeast and crippled the Fukushima nuclear plant, known as the triple disaster,” The Guardian reports. “Radiation that spewed from the plant’s melted reactors contaminated the surrounding areas, forcing about 160,000 residents to evacuate at one point. More than 50,000 are still displaced because of lingering safety concerns. The plant is being decommissioned, a process expected to take decades.”

  • Concise headlines. Original content. Timely news and views from a select group of opinion leaders. Special extras.
  • Everything you need, nothing you don’t.
  • The Weekender: The climate news you need.
New!
Subscribe

Nearly a decade and 13 lower court decisions later, this week’s ruling held the Japanese government and Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) negligent “for failing to take measures to prevent the 2011 nuclear disaster,” the UK-based paper adds. The ruling doubles a compensation claim imposed by a lower court in 2017.

The government hasn’t said whether it will appeal the ruling, and Reuters said TEPCO spokespeople were unavailable for comment. In court, the government had said the tsunami couldn’t have been predicted, while the utility said it had met its compensation requirements under government guidelines.

But “the court said the government could have taken measures to protect the site, based on expert assessments available in 2002 that indicated the possibility of a tsunami of more than 15 metres,” The Guardian writes.

Now, “we ask the government to extend relief measures as soon as possible, not only for the plaintiffs but for all victims based on the damage they suffered,” said the plaintiffs’ head lawyer, Izutaro Managi, who declared the decision a major victory.

Additional claims may be in the offing because “thousands of other residents evacuated as reactors at the coastal power station overheated and released a radioactive cloud, following the devastating tsunami,” The Guardian writes. Only some of them have since returned home.

While plaintiffs said the ruling brought “some justice”, the paper adds, their lives will never be the same. “For more than nine years, I have planted seeds on the contaminated soil and grown vegetables, always worrying about the effects of radiation,” said farmer Kazuya Tarukawa, a plaintiff from the Fukushima area. “Our contaminated land will never be the same.”



in Asia, Biodiversity & Habitat, Climate & Society, Climate Impacts & Adaptation, Fossil Fuels, Health & Safety, Jurisdictions, Legal & Regulatory, Nuclear, Oceans

The latest climate news and analysis, direct to your inbox

Subscribe

Related Posts

United Nations
Air & Marine

Salvage of $20B ‘Floating Time Bomb’ Delayed by Rising Cost of Oil Tankers

January 27, 2023
29
RL0919/wikimedia commons
Finance & Investment

Danske Bank Quits New Fossil Fuel Financing

January 23, 2023
2.1k
@tongbingxue/Twitter
Ending Emissions

Extreme Warming Ahead Even as Worst-Case Scenarios Grow ‘Obsolete’

January 23, 2023
275

Comments 2

  1. Timm Bacher says:
    2 years ago

    The picture shown is an oil refinery fire, not the Fukushima nuclear power plant meltdown. A site that claims to inform about energy should know the difference. Sad.

    Reply
    • Mitchell Beer says:
      2 years ago

      Well, I’d be skeptical of any site that set out to inform about a field as complex and all-encompassing as climate change and energy and claimed to get absolutely everything right, 100% of the time. We don’t miss often, but when we do we acknowledge the error, make the correction, thank the source (even if they’re snarking at us), and genuinely appreciate the opportunity to crowdsource the repair. (If a nuclear utility like TEPCO had taken a similar approach to its gaps and failures, ‘Fukushima’ might never have become synonymous with ‘disaster’.)
      So, thank you — when rechecked the photo, we saw that it wasn’t explicitly identified as an oil refinery *or* an exploding nuclear plant, so we’ve gone back and replaced it.

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I agree to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

Trending Stories

RL0919/wikimedia commons

Danske Bank Quits New Fossil Fuel Financing

January 23, 2023
2.1k
United Nations

Salvage of $20B ‘Floating Time Bomb’ Delayed by Rising Cost of Oil Tankers

January 27, 2023
29
@tongbingxue/Twitter

Extreme Warming Ahead Even as Worst-Case Scenarios Grow ‘Obsolete’

January 23, 2023
275
EcoAnalytics

Albertans Want a Just Transition, Despite Premier’s Grumbling

January 23, 2023
207
Rachel Notley/Facebook

Notley Scorches Federal Just Transition Bill as Fossil CEO Calls for Oilsands Boom

January 23, 2023
260
James Vincent Wardhaugh/flickr

Canada Sidelines Ontario’s Ring of Fire, Approves Separate Mining Project

December 4, 2022
380

Recent Posts

Weirton, WV by Jon Dawson/flickr

IRON OXIDE: New Battery Brings Long-Duration Storage to Grids, 750 Jobs to West Virginia

January 23, 2023
499
Sergio Boscaino/flickr

Dubai Mulls Quitting C40 Cities Over ‘Costly’ Climate Target

January 24, 2023
86
hangela/pixabay

New UK Coal Mine Faces Two Legal Challenges

January 24, 2023
44

Gas Stoves Enter U.S. Climate Culture War, Become ‘Bellwether’ for Industry

January 22, 2023
74
Jeff Hitchcock/flickr.

BREAKING: GFANZ Banks, Investors Pour Hundreds of Billions into Fossil Fuels

January 23, 2023
495

Exxon Had the Right Global Warming Numbers Through Decades of Denial: Study

January 17, 2023
223
Next Post
AWeith/Wikimedia Commons

Suppressed Study Shows Polar Bears at Risk from Alaska Oil and Gas Drilling

The Energy Mix - The climate news you need

Copyright 2023 © Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

  • About
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy and Copyright
  • Cookie Policy

Proudly partnering with…

scf_withtagline
No Result
View All Result
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities

Copyright 2022 © Smarter Shift Inc. and Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

Manage Cookie Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Manage options Manage services Manage vendors Read more about these purposes
View preferences
{title} {title} {title}